The Sun. — London, England, 1864-02-10 00:00:00

fer ence by this country in the civil war now raging in China was unnecessary and impolitic. (Hear, hear.) ELECTION PETITIONS. Mr. HL NT gave notice that he would move for leave to bring in a bill to emend the law relating to election peti. tions. FOG SIGNALS. Mr. DAWSON asked the President of the Board of Trade, whether, in consequence of the numerous marine disasters that have taken place at the entrance of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, any plans for the erection of powerful fog , . signals in the vicinity of Cape Race,Newfoundland, had yet been approved of by the Board of Trade; and whether any expectation may be held out that such precautionary beacons may be in early operation. Mr. M. GIBSON said that the Trinity Corporation had for some time been anxious to establish fog signals at Cape Race, but up to the present time had failed in discovering any invention by which sound could be conveyed from land to vessels t.t a certain distance at sea that would be avail- able. THE RUMOURED DISSATISFACTION AT COPENHAGEN. In reply to Mr. PEACOCE, Lord PALMERSTON said he had seen a statement in the papers that great dissatisfaction prevailed in Copen hagen as to the retreat of the Danish troops from Dane wirke; and although the Government had no official in formation on the subject, there was no doubt the inhabitants of Copenhagen felt great dissatisfaction in regard to the event in question. " Gentlemen at home at ease" no doubt might feel dissatis fied with the conduct of those who were suddenly called to decide on an emergency. It was not for this country to decide on the propriety of the ground which induced the Danish general to retire from the Danewirke. THE ALEXANDRA AND ALABAMA. Mr. PEACOCKE asked the:Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the Government would lay upon the table of the house copies of their correspondence with the Government of the 'United States, and more especially that portion of it relating to the case of the Alexandra, and the claim by the United States Government for compensation for the losses inflicted by the Alabama and other Con- federate cruisers' Mr. LAYARD said as regarded the Alexandra, as the case of that vessel was under judicial consideration, it would not be advisable to lay any documents relative to the same on the table. With reference to the Alabama, papers had already been laid on the table. SAL3ION FISHERIES. Mr. DUTTON asked tl4e Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it was his intention to introduce any bill amending the Salmon Fisheries (England) Act of 1861, and giving extended powers for the preservation of salmon in fresh and tidal waters? Sir G. GREY said the subject was being investigated by a commission. DANISH PAPERS. In reply to Lord R. CECIL, Mr. LAYARD said that these papers would not be ready for presentation to Parliament before three weeks. (Oh, oh.) SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN. Mr. D'ISRA ELI—I wish to Rieke an inquiry of the noble lord the First Minister with respect to an answer which he gave yesterday, which has occasioned some perplexity. It was with reference to an inquiry as to whether the Court of Berlin had notified to our Government that in consequence of the war between Prussia and Denmark it no longer held itself bound by the Treaty of 1852. The noble lord, as I understood him, seemed to say that no such communica tion had been received by our Government from the Court of Berlin ; but at the same time ho expressed the opinion of the Government upon such a csurse of conduct had it been pursued by the Prussian Government. The noble lord said that ho should look upon such a proposition as most unjust and monstrous. (An hon. member—" Prepos terous.") Preposterous—a word of nearly the same sig nificance. The question asked yesterday was not as to the morality of that conduct, but as to its legality. Having heard the noble lord's opinion of such possible conduct, I wish to know whether he is of opinion, or whether we are to conclude that her Majesty's Government are of opinion, that, in consequence of the war between Prussia and Den mark, Prussia may b.) relieved from the undertakings which by the Treaty of 1852 she has entered into with this conn- try, and with the other signatories of the treaty, or whether those engagements on the part of Prussia are not totally independent of any relations which may subsist between Prussia and Denmark. (Hear, hear.) There is another matter referring ahaismt to the same subject, and certainly to the answer given by the noble lord yesterday, on which I should like to have some information. The noble lord seemed in that answer to intimate that the German Powers had announced that, when the invasion of the Duchies had been completed they should be prepared to evacuate those Duchies as soon as all the causes—the avowed causes—for which the invasion had taken place were removed and their object effected. What I wish to know from her Maje~ty'e G ,vernrnent, as a second inquiry, whether before the inva sion of the Danish Duchies took place, an event of which no, notice was given to the world, her Majesty's Govern. mutt obtained from the. Governments of Austria and Prus sia any undertaking that when these Duchies had been in vaded and occupied, if the avowed objects of the invasion were obtained, they would restore the Duchies to the King of Denmark. (Hear, hear.) Lord PALMERSTON—I think that what I stated—at all events, what I meant to state, yesterday was, that a notion had been broached in Germany and in some quarters at Berlin that if a state of war could be established between Prussia and Austria and Danmark, that would release those two Bowers from the engagement of the Treaty of 1852. I stated my opinion upon that point, but I meant to say, or to imily, that that was not the doctrine upon which Austria and Prussia at present take their stand, inasmuch as they have declared, by that paper which was read here and in the other House of Parliament, that they acknowledge the binding nature of the Treaty of 1852, and adhere to the intention of maintaining the integrity of the Danish monarchy, and therefore they cannot contend that their hostilities with Denmark have released them from the en gagements of that treaty. But I entirely concur with the view which I infer that the right hon. gentleman takes that, even if that condition of things existed be tween Denmark and the two Powers which could be ra tionally called war, and which if the engagement had been contracted simply between these two Powers and Denmark might and would have put an end to that treaty, still the Treaty of 1852 was not a treaty contracted simply between Austria and Prussia, on the one hand, and Denmark on the other—(hear) —hut was an engagement which they entered into, in common with the other great Powers who signed and the Powers and States who acceded to that treaty, and that they could not be relieved from that common engage ment by anything which may take place between them separately and Denmark. That opinion I found not simply upon the reason of the thing. there is a case precisely in point. The five Powers entered into a treaty with Turkey by which they agreed to respect the neutrality of the Bos phorus and the Dardanelles, and that no ships of war of any of the Powers should enter those straits without the speecial permission of the Porte, and then only a certain number at a time. Tho ratifications of that treaty were exchanged with Turkey, and not among all tb'. Powers who signed it, just as in the case of the Treaty of 1852 the ratifications were exchanged in London between each of the Powers and Denmark, and the Powers did not go through the unnecessary form of exchanging ratifications with each other. When the British fleet entered the Dar danelles at the commencement of the Russian war, Austria protested against that act as a violation of the common en gagement which by the treaty regulating the passage of the Dardanelles was taken by all the Powers. An answer was given, which in our opinion was sufficient ; but that proved that in the opinion of Austria herself a general engagement taken by many Powers towards one was binding upon all who took it, not simply between each and the party con- Cor ild, but as with respect to the allies with whom that engagement was taken. THE TOWNLEY CASE. In reply to Sir F. KELLY. Sir 0 ° G REY stated that the papers connected with this case, including the certificates of the borough magistrates a nd medical men upon which Townley had been removed to the lunatic asylum, would be in the hands of members Lefore he moved the second reading of the bill which he had introduced the previous night. SCHLESWI G-HOLSTEIN. Mr. DISRAELI—In continuation of the question put to the noble lard, I wish to ask whether what was callen a despatch the other ntght—a document which, 3 believe, was considered very ambiguous, and was treated with derision by the Secretary of State—is the last and only evidence the Government possess of the intention of Au s t r i a and Prussia to uphold the Treaty of 1802 ? I would also take the liberty of reminding the noble lord that he has omitted to answer raytsecond question. Lord PALMERSTON—I had just discovered my un i n. tentlonal omission to answer the last question of the right hon. gentleman, and was about to do so. The despatch alluded to is certainly the last official communication re. ceived by the Government ; but I consider that it is com plete in regard to the recognition of the Treaty of 1852 and the maintenance of the integrity of the Danish Monarchy. We certainly have no guarantee on the part of Austria and Prussia that they will evacuate Schleswig when the Constitution is revoked ; but we have the assurance in our own minds that they are two Powers which must think their character for good faith of some value. The ground, and the only ground, on which I apprehend they have entered Schleswig and occupied it, as a material guarantee, was to obtain the revocation of the Constitution of November, as far as it relates to Schleswig, And, therefore, I think, they will find, when that demand has been complied with, that they are bound by honour and good faith to give up that occupation which they undertook simply for the pur pose of obtaining that revocation. ASH-WEDNESDAY. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Lord PALMERSTON, again rising, said—lt is usual for this house on 'Ash -WfArlesday to meet at two o'clock, in stead of at the usual time. I understand, however, that there is really no business for to-morrow, the hon. and gallant member fur the Queen's County having postponed, or consented t 3 postpone, the motion of which he had given notice. It will, therefore, I think, be more convenient that the house, instead of meeting at two o'clock to-morrow, should adjourn till Thursday. (Hear, hear.) SCHL ES W IG-HOLSTEIN. Mr. S. FITZGERALD—I cannot avoid ta'c't g the op portunity which this tucti - on gives me to edress u fete words to the house upon the extraordin try armer which was given with reference to the Danish papers by the hon. gentleman the tinder-Secretary f7,r Foreign Affairs. That is a question upon which the heart of this country is set, which agitates nearly every portion of the Continent, and upon which this house and the country are aiieed in de manding the most complete information, not only as to the facts that are passing, but as to the cond uc t p ursue d f rom day to day by her Majesty's Government, and the course they have pursued for weeks past. (Hear.) The hon. gentleman being asked when we may expect information on these points quietly tells the house that no papers at all can be given before a period of three weeks. (Cheers.) Three weeks I why, what may have happened in three weeks ? In the spaceof three days we have seen the Duchy of Schleswig overrun, we have seen a gallant people beaten down by an overpowering force. (Loud cheers.) And yet on such a question as this the Government tell the House of Commons that they are to remain contentedly in the dark for a period of three weeks I Now, I beg to point out to the house that as regards Japan papers were promised in her Majesty's Speech ; but respecting Denmark complete silence was observed, and no information was promised to the House of Commons, And as to the difficulty of pub- - - lishing these papers the noble lord at the head of the Foreign Office when he chooses to do so is at no loss for means of giving information to the public about his policy and the course which he is going to take. We know very well that in the course of the autumn the noble lord, before the ink of a particular despatch was dry, hurried it off to the London Gazette, and in the columns of the Gazette it was published even before it reached the Power to whom that despatch was addressed. (Cheers.) I think the house will conceive from the answer of the hon. gentleman and from the course taken by her Majesty's Government on this subject that they fear discussion. (Hear, hear.) They know very well, with the feeling which always prevails in this house, that there will be no discussion until the house has had ample means of forming an opinion; and they hope by delay to tide over the critical time, and to avoid a discussion of their policy, and of the course they have pursued. I therefore appeal to the noble lord at the head of the Government to rectify what I may almost call the tortuous policy of the Foreign-office, and to give, at the earliest moment, the most complete and most ample information to the House of Commons. (Cheers.) Mr. LAYARD—I think the hon. gentleman has wasted a good deal of virtuous indignation. (Cries of No, no.) There is no desire on the part of the Government either to avoid discussion or to waste time in this matter. The hon. gentleman has filled the office which I have the honour to fill at present, and ought to be aware that there is great diffi cul'y in publishing a complete set of papers upon transac tions of this kind. In the first place, the hon. gentleman knows we cannot lay on the table of the house documents communicated by foreign Powers without first consulting them as to whether or not they wish them to be published. That is a matter of courtesy, and it is a rule which is always followed. I can only say that I saw the printer to-day, and also communicated with the clerks at the Foreign office. The other night I stated that I hoped these papers would be speedily produced, and I then hoped that they would be produced next week, but they are so voluminous that I am assured this is impossible if we wish to present the papers in a perfect form. I have no doubt if the house desires to have them in instalments portions can be furnished, but I doubt whether the house will thus obtain the exact infor mation which it desires. I can assure the house that every possible speed shall be used in expediting the production of the papers. They shall be laid on the table at the very earliest moment—l cannot give any other answer. But I assure the house there is no intention on the part of the Go vernment to retard even by one day the publication of the documents. Mr. DISRAELI—I think we have not yet received a satisfactory answer on the part of the Government. The aff tirs of Germany and Denmark were of so grave a chars ter some time ago that it might have been a question for the Government whether they should not have advised the Sovereign to assemble Parliament at an earlier period. (Cheers.) That was the feeling of men of very different political opinions. But there are, I know, very grave reasons which might operate to restrain the Government from giving that advice, except under most urgent circumstances. How ever, if Parliament were not summoned earlier than usual, I think her Majesty's Government were bound the moment it assembled—(cheers) --to place in our hands the documents necessary to form an opinion on this all engrossing and all important subject,—a subject upon which the question of peace or war, or even of a general war, may ultimately have to be decided, and with regard to which at this moment we are completely in the dark. The technical answer of the tinder-Secretary is most unsatisfactory. He tells us he went to the printer to-day. Welt, but the Under-Secretary ought to have gone to the printer long before; he ought to have gone every day and, if necessary, every hour before Parlia ment met to the printer for these papers. (Cheers and laughter.) Re ought to have insisted on these papers being ready to present to Parliament, the first night. I took occasion on the opening day to notice the strange omission from the Royal Speech of any promise that papers on the subject of Germany and Denmark would be produced. What was the answer of the noble lord ? He said his ob ject was that the Speech should no; be too long. (A laugh.) Yet he found space to insert in that Speech a promise that the papers respecting Japan—no doubt, an interesting and important subject, but contrasted will' the European ques • Lion of Germany and Denmark, a matter of comparatively trifling importance—should be forthcoming. There was room for that in the Speech. But when I pressed the noble lord for these papers, he treated the matter with derision, and said, " You shall have papers ; you shall have plenty of them, and I hope hon. members will study them. I have read a good many of them (said the noble lord) and I have got a surfeit of them." It was clear to me at that time that her Majesty's Government had no settled determination to present these papers to Parliament—(cheers)—and, coup ling the tone of his address with the omission of any pro mise of the documents in the Royal Speech, I must say the non-production of papers on such an important subject was a great inadvertence, and one which I think it would be difficult to vindicate. Practically, I take it for granted that the mass of these papers, either in manuscript or in proof sheets, are now prepared, and that permis sion to print them has been obtained from all the foreign Powers. That is a mere mechanical affair. The printer of the Foreign-office was rubbed up to-day for the first time, and, frightened at th© mass of documents before him, no doubt made the same sort of calculation which he would have done if an ordinary thick pamphlet on the Schleswig-Holstein question—and we have seen many of them—were brought to him. He said they would require three weeks to print. But if you have all the materials ready, and the credit of the Foreign-office be at stake, you must endeavour to compensate for former laches by dis tributing these documents into the hands of several printers—(hear, hear)—and I will be bound to say, with proper diligence, that you ought to produce these papers to Parliament in eight and forty hours. The house ought to insist on these papers being placed in their hands in 48 hours, or otherwise to relinquish the fulfilment of their highest duty. (Hear, hear,) Lord PALMERSTON said—Sir, I think that the right hon. gentleman is taking a leaf out of the book of the Prus sian and Austrian Governments, who called on Denmark to revoke a constitution in 43 hours, when that could only be constitutionally accomplished by the instrumentality of a parliament not then assembled. (Laughter.) I can assure the right hon gentleman—he can believe me or not as he likes—(a laugh)—l took it BO much as a matter of course that papers on so important a matter as Denmark and Ger many must necessarily be presented to Parliament, that it was totally unnecessary to mention them in the speech—if it was an omission I am sorry for it. So far as its arising from any doubt whether the papers should or should not be presented, I might as well have doubted my own existence as the obligation of the Government to lay them before Par liament, There was no doubt about it. The hon. gentle man is perhaps not quite so well aware as the hon. member for Horsham of the labour of preparing an accurate print of a 'vast mass of documents; it is not only the printing of them, hut they must be looked over after by a competent person to see that there are no mistakes of the press and that all has been accurately done. The Under Secretary stated to the house that if it is desired these documents may be produced in parts, and perhaps this might be the most convenient manner ; and if hon. members desire they may have Part I. and then Part IL—(a laugh)—before they come to the matter they intend to discuss ; but no delay shall take place in laying before the house the whole of the papers. Lord J. MANNERS said—l can quite believe the noble lord that there will be no unnecessary delay for the future in the course of delivery of these papers; but, certainly, a great and unnecessary delay had occurred in the presentation of the papers up to the present time. It was impossible to listen to what fell on a former occasion and not see that however necessary it may be for the noble lord opposite to lay these papers on the table at the same time there was not that energy to lay these papers before the house that was to be expected in a matter of such vital importance. (Hear, hear.) No doubt these papers have been kept back in the Foreign Office, and have not whichpapers they brought w were e been bro ug h t f orward in the state of preparation they should have bee n . (H ear, hear.) I presume now we shall have these beforeusintean m m u in ch ut l e e s ss ag t o im , that a e n t d ha l n h)pcw in e shall not be disappointed. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HENNESSY said he asked the Government two nights ago whether the papers promised as to Poland would contain the despatch from Earl Russell to Prince (mortecha keff, to which great importance was attached just now at Berlin and Vienna for its b ear i ng on the Danish question. It was sent in the autumn, recalled by tele g raph, altered, and re-sent , When that despatch ar r i ve d it was nu derstood that Count Rechberg and AI. Bismark called attention to the declaration made by Earl Russell in his speech at Blair gowrie, to the effect that the dominion of Russia over Po land was forfeited by reason of the non - complianc e of Rus sia with the treaty of Vienna; and the German Powersnow state that that principle would in some degree apply to the case of Denmark. They say that the treaty of London had not been fulfilled by Denmark, and therefore the treat) of London was void. Now it was very important to get that despatch. He wished to ask whether the Government would THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY ,14, 1864: produce that original despatch nent from the Foreign Office with the sanction 43f the queen, signed by the Secretary of State, but whicli was afterwards withdrawn and altered. Rir li. CAIRNS said—l wish also to ask a question relative to papers we had printed this morning, some papers on American affairs containing despatches, some from the other side of the water, some from the American Minister here. But there has been one despatch of very goat importance and of a peculiar character which has been printed in America, and reprinted in the ordinary channels of information in this country. It was dated, I think, 11th July last year. If I understand, this despatch, coming flora the American Minister of Foreign Affairs, was to be read to Earl Russell and a copy of it left with him, and it is evidently far more material than any yet laid on the table. I wish to ask her Majesty's Government whether they are prepared to communicate that despatch to the House of Commons, and at the same time the answer that was returned either to Lord Lyons or sent directly, or whether they are prepared to state that no answer was sent. (Cheers.) Mr. LAYARD—When that despatch is comeauni- cated to her Majesty's Government it will be published. It was never presented t. her Majesty's Government, and her Majesty's Government have no knowledge of any such despatch. I do not quite understand to what despatch the other hon. gentleman alludes to in reference to Poland. If there is such a despatch—and I think there is not—if he will communicate with me privately on the subject it shall be produced. Lord R. CECIL—Do I understand the secretary to say that no despatch from Mr. Adams to the Foreign-office, conveying the demands which Mr. Seward made, has been forwarded to the Foreign-office, and if thereis no despatch, is there any memorandum of any verbal application con veying the same insolent demands ? Mr. LAYAR D—l have stated that although that de spatch appeared in the newspapers, we have no knowledge of it ; it was never communicated, and we cannot pro- ing have been in dealing with the Government of Japan. (Cheers.) Admiral WALCOTT supported the amendment, and ex. pressed an opinion that the papers on the subject justified him in declaring that no blame could be imputed to Admi- ral Kuper. Lord R. MONTAGU argued that the Government had no course before them but to enforce the demand for redress for the murders and acts of violence committed by the Japanese on British subjects. Sir F. CROSSLEY lamented the great loss of life that had ensued from the bombardment of Kagosima, and con demned the adoption of such a high-handed policy in our communications with Eastern nations. The time had arrived when it behoved the Foreign-office to endeavour to uphold the honour of the country, without resorting to these wholesale sacrifices of human life. Mr. LIDDELL deprecated the system of hastily con- eluding treaties, under tho gins of our ships, with cations of whose habits, customs, and laws we had no knowledge. How . we could expect a treaty to be faithfully observed which had been obtained under such circumstances passed his com prehension. Our proceedings in Japan had been marked by a violence that was deeply to be deplored, and he held that the treaty made g ith that country ought to be revised, if possible, in conjunction with those who were acquainted with the laws and customs of Japan. Mr. KINGL AKE reminded the house that when the official account of the bombardment of Kagosima reached England, Earl Russell at once wrote a dispatch to Colonel. Neale, expressive of the regret he felt at the destruction of that town. He did not believe that the noble earl had given an imperative order to destroy the residenc3 of the Prince of Satsuma, whether it were situated on a bare hill or in a populous city ; but he hesitated not to say that our treaties had broken up the political system of the state in Japan, In the present state of their information with regard to the details of the late engagement at Kagosima, he thought it would be unjust to throw any blame or seeming blame upon Admiral Kuper. Mr. LAYARD said no one who had attended to his hon. friend the member for Maidstone would bo surprised that he considered it his duty to submit to the house the question which he that evening brought before them. (Hear.) His hon. friend's well 'known sympathy with the human race every one who knew him would agree in acknowledging, and all would be ready to do him justice in feeling that he he was right in bring the question before the House of Com mons. (Hear, hear.) If he could not agree in all that his hon. friend had said, it was not that he could not agree in the principles whioh he had laid down, but in the manner in which he had tried to establish his facts. Ho entirely agreed with his hon. friend that it was most deplorable and deeply to be regretted that a town should be bombarded and laid in ruins, as Kagosima was reported to have been. (Hear, hear.) He agreed with him, that nothing but the greatest, the most extreme provocation could justify such a course ; and he entirely agreed with him that it was a ter rible sight to witness the condition to which the inhabi tants were reduced, and upon those matters there was no difference of feeling and opinion between himself and his hen. friend, who, he was sure, would not charge him with want of sympathy with Eastern nations. He (Mr. Layard) was known to have expressed his regret on several occa- alone at the manner in which those races had been treated, port. town. Now, such being the general principles laid down, let him see whether they applied to the present instance. But be fore he did so he must say be could not concur in the blame cast upon so gallant and meritorious an officer as Admiral Kuper. (Hear, hear.) And here he must say that it had been too much the habit of some parties in this country to blame officers In their absence for alleged transactions before inqui'y had taken place to ascertain whether the charges were correct. (Hear, hear.) He must say that he did not think Admiral Kuper could be charged with shedding blood wantonly; and he must further say of that gallant officer that a more humane man could not be than he had always shown himself to be. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member here proceeded to draw a sketch of the relations of this country with Japan previous to the occurrence in ques tion. This country was not the first, he said, to enter into a treaty with Japan. An American commodore was the first, and having made the American treaty, Russia then stepped in and made a treaty with the Japanese on ber own account. Was it, then, matter of surprise —seeing that Ame rica and Russia, two great commercial nations, had made treaties to advance their commercial interests, and thus opened up new markets for themselves—that England, on her part, followed the example, and with a view of availing herself of the now markets, made a treaty:of commerce with the Japanese. (Hear, hear.) They were condemned for, and charged with, having forced a treaty upon the Japanese, which the authorities of Japan, it was said, had no power to make. They understood the Tycoon to be the head autho rity of Japan at the time, and they entered into the treaty with him. They ascertained that there were three parties in Japan at the time, and that a great part of the natives were ill-treated and kept in a state of Slavery by the Daimios. Of the three parties one of them, he understood, was known by the name of " Toree"—(laughter)—and that party were most hostile in their acts and feelings against foreigners, particularly against the Eoglieh. Another of those parties was called " Liberal Torees"—(laughter)—and the third were known as the party who were for keeping to themselves all the good places, and sticking to them. (Great laughter.) There was also a party who were for the maintenance of the " connexion between Church and State." (Laughter.) Much outrage and injustice had been committed against foreigners, particularly those from England, and the re monstrances of the Government against those outrageous ex cesses were not attended to. It had been said that the Eri tish Government was unfriendly to and did not like the Japanese. Now, so far from that being the case, they had in this country made great concessions to the Japanese, and not only did they do so themselves, but they actually in duced other Powers to make concessions to them, (Hear, hear.) He could assure the house that in Mr. Richardson's case neither be nor his friends were in fault. He (Mr. Layard) was not in the habit of defending the excesses of his countrymen; and he was sorry to say that they were often guilty of excesses that no man ought to defend. (Hear, hear.) In Mr. Rhhardson'ts case that was not so. A most unprovoked murder had been committed on that gentleman and other members of his party by a number of men who had been ea on to commit it by their leaders. Mr. Richard son and his party were proceeding quietly along a high read that was open to them by treaty, and were most wantonly and without any provocation whatever attacked. Murder was committed, and the party, when remonstrated with, tried to excuse themselves by saying that it was a "casual' , murder. He had never before heard of a casual murder. A more deliberate murder, he repeated, never was com mitted. The English Government remonstrated, and de manded satisfaction, but their remonstrances were disre warded, and their demand was treated with contempt. Was it then to be a matter of surprise that they insisted upon proper redress being given by the Japanese Government for such an outrage ? (Hear,) The Government made demands upon the Tycoon Government and also upon Satsuma. In the first place they demanded £lOO,OOO from the Japanese Government—not for the murder, but for allowing the mur der on a road which was open by treaty, on a road on which it was their bounden duty to protect lite. (Hear.) That was entirely irrespective of the murder. Then they had de manded from the person who committed the murder what they considered to be a fair sum to be divided amongst those who were sufferers. That sum was £25,000. Some might think that sum too much, others might consider it too little. Mr. Richardson, who was murdered, was a wealthy mar chant, and his death was a serious blow to his family. He did not, therefore, consider that the sum was an unreason able one. The other persons concerned were merchants in a good position in life, and for them the turn demanded he could not consider was too much. Besides that, her Ma jesty's Goves nment asked for the execution of those who had been concerned in the affair. Now, it had been stated that evening as a matter of fact, that her Majesty's Government had asked for the execution of Satsuma's father. So far from that being the case, they had stated over and over again that nothing of the sort was done. In the first place, they did not know that it was Satsuma's father who had committed the murder. Their first impression was that it was his uncle. (Laughter.) They asked for the trial and punishment of the retainers of the chief who had committed the act. If hon. gentlemen would refer to page 94. of the Blue-book they would find that the Government demanded the speedy arrest and bringing to capital punishment the men among the Prince's retinue, and not the Prince himself. Satsuma had stated that no order had been given for this attack. If no order had been given them surely the Govern ment had a right to ask for the punishment of those who had committed so grave an offence without an order, and that was all they did ask for. (Hear, hear.) He thought it would be admitted that those demands, under the circum stances, were perfectly just; but if they had accepted the excuse of the Tycoon, that Satsuma was beyond his power, and that he had no control over his retainers, the Daimios, under the shelter of that excuse, would have committed all sorts of outrages. If, on the other hand, they had exacted the punishment of the Daimios alone, in all future cases the Tycoon would have said that the crimes had been perpe trated by the Daimios, and that they alone were responsible. So that the Government had no alternative but to make a double demand, and be thought that was the right course to pursue. Was the English Government alone amongst those who had punished the Daimios for outrages against foreigners? If hon. gentlemen would turn to the Blue book they would find that joint representations had been made by the English, French, Dutch, and American Mi nisters, that the y held a Prince who had fired upon a ship responsible for that act, and would proceed to punish it if the injury were not redressed. They did punish him by destroying his batteries and forts. Now, Admiral Kuper, on receiving his instructions, proceeded to can y them out, It had been stated that the instructions of her Majesty's Government were not sufficiently explicit, and that i t was on that account that the admiral committed the act ho and that consequently the responsibility must fall upon the Government. Now, vhen the instructions were sent out, her Majesty's Government had not the slightest knowledge of the palace in whisb. Satsuma dwelt, or of its position. They had heard that be had a palace near the shore, that he was a powerful Princa having vessels of his own, and that the fl.et could get to those vessels and carry them off. The Government gave instructions to the admiral founded upon this imperfect knowledto, Eearl Russell, in his instructions, stated that he had heard that Satsuma's territory was a peninsula, but that the admiral would be able to form a bet ter judgment whether it would be possible to take his port. The Government did not even know that there was a large town there. (Laughter.) He was at a loss to understand why hon, gentlemen laughed. He repeated that in England here was no knowledge of that town. The fleet arrived here on the 11th, and cast anchor at the entrance of the Next day they went further and anchored before the What was the first thing the Japanese did ? They invited Admiral Kuper and Colonel Neale to go on shore to conduct negotiations with them. Many gentlemen who had great confidence in the Japanese might think that they ought to have done so; but Admiral Kuper and Colonel Neale thought they had better not run any risk of being led into a trap, and very wisely declined the invitation. (Hear.) On the following day a person calling himself a chief, with his retainers, approached Admiral Kuper's ship and asked to,be allowed to come on board. There could not be a moral doubt that these persons, having little knowledge of the at.: rangements of an English man-of•war, thought they could capture the ship by a coup de main, and when the Japanese official found that he was outwitted he became speechless, and went off with great rapidity. No doubt these were two attempts to entrap the Britieh officers; the first to entrap the officers on shore, and the second to capture the ship. All this time the batteries were being manned. Colonel Neale, finding that it was no use to withhold any longer ordered Admiral Kuper to take possession of the ships belonging to Satsuma, and the Admiral did every thing ho could to carry out his instructions with the least possible harshness. A statement had appeared in some of the papers which he regretted to find the hon. member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) had endorsed, that after captur ing the ships Admiral Kuper needlessly kept them for a long time under the eyes of the Japanese. The truth was, that the admiral could not have taken the vessels out of the bay without passing under the fire of the batteries. So far from the admiral having kept the vessels under the eyes of the Japanese in order to draw down their fire, he took them as far as possible to the opposite side of the bay. No sooner were the vessels taken than the Japanese opened fire. He did not deny that the Japanese had a perfect right to do so, but 7hat he did deny was, that it was the duty of the British admiral to allow himself to be fired upon without returning it. If he had done so, what would have been the result ? There would have been a cry throughout the whole of Japan that our fleet had been defeated, our settlements would have been plundered, and probably every foreigner in the coun try would have been murdered. (Hear.) It was, then, the clear duty of the admiral to return the fire. The hon. mem ber for Wakefield had stated that it would have been impos sible for Admiral Kuper to have returned the fire without burning the town, and upon the high authority of that gal lant gentleman he was content to rest the admiral's excul pation. It had been said that shells had been thrown in the town, but nothing was saidabout such a circumstance in the reports, nor was anything said about bombardment, with the exception of the second day,when shells were thrown intothe palace of Satsuma. On the first day no shell was thrown into the town; on the contrary, the return of the firs from the batteries led to the firing of the town. Let hon. mem bers consider what a Japanese town really was. It was built simply of thin laths and paper—very little timber indeed. Fires wero constantly occurring in these towns, The people constantly lived in fear of life, and were always ready to move, He had spoken with several officers on the subject, being anxious to ascertain the truth on the point, and he found that firee in Japanese towns:were the commonest possible occurrences. The officials had four days' notice of the operations against them, and during that time they were preparing to attack the British fleet. If, therefore, the people suffered injury, it was the duty of the officials to warn them to remove, and he had every reason to believe they did so. It was possible that there was loss of life there. If so, no one more sincerely deplored it than himself ; but, at the same time, it would be some consolation to think that the loss of life was very small indeed amongst the peaceable inhabitants. (Hear, hear) lie (Mr. Layard) had resided some time in a town which was peculiarly liable to fires; he meant Constantinople. In that town there was a fire almost every month, consuming as many residences as at Kagosima, although the area over which they extended was not so great, as the houses were higher. In Constan- tinople a fire raged with extraordinary rapidity, destroying many houses in the course of a few hours, and yet he never heard of a single loss of life by fire there. The people lived in c ,nstant readiness to move, and loss of live from fire was consequently hardly known. These considerations led him to hope that few lives of innocent persons were lost at Kagosima. No doubt there was a considerable loss of lite amongst the retainers of the Daimio. They fought against the British fleet, they manned their batteries, and they consequently ran all the risks which men engaged in war were bound to run, but of the quiet peaceable inhabitants he very much doubted whether any, or a very few, at all events, met their death. On the second day it was neces sary, according to the admiral's view, to destroy the palace of Satsuma. Could he, after the destruction of the pro perty of the poor, leave the palace of the chief malefactor untouched? lie (Mr. Layard) thought not, and the admiral very properly threw shells into the palace. There was no proof that shells went into the town. It might be assumed that they did, but there was not the slightest evidence of the fact. The hon. gentleman the member for Maidstone (Mr. Buxton), in the early part of his speech, said that he would call evidence in support of his views, and he (Mr. Layard) thought that he would have called witnesses of some standing. The first was a picture in the Illustrated Neu's. Now, he did not wish to say anything against that admirable paper. Those who were in the secret would en tertain doubts whether that paper had on board the Euryalus a correspondent who witnessed the town of Kagosima in flames. Then another portion of evidence on which he relied was a statement which had appeared in the Aylesbury papers. Now, he had a great respect for the Aylesbury pacers, but he could not take evidence second-hand from their columns, the hon, gentleman himself not having seen the paper from which his information was derived. Mr. BUXTON—It was the statement of a sailor who was an eye-witness of what he described. Mr. LAYARD—WeII, he should like to know the sailor's name, or what authority there was for the statement. In the absence of that information he preferred to take the statement of a British Admiral. (Hear, hear.) What ho had now stated was a short history of what took place at Kagosima. The house would now perhaps allow him for a few moments to call attention to the motion of his hon. friend. As regarded Admiral Kuper's judgment there was no wish on the part of the Government to cast blame upon him. On the contrary, it was the duty of the Govern ment to support him, because he was entitled to support. It was asked why the Government had not given him the same honorary distinctions which they had conferred upon Colonel Neale. The distinctions given to Colonel Neale were not on account of what took place at Kagosinea, but for the judgment and tact which he had displayed in conducting most difficult negotiations. Why they were not conferred upon Admiral Kuper was because there had been for a time a strong feeling in the country. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches.) Her Majesty's Government thought it only reasonable Admiial Kuper should be enabled to give explanations, and he had no doubt some explana tions would be perfectly satisfactory. It would be unwise and ungenerous to pass such a resolution as this, which would be tantamount to a vote of censure, before those ex planations could be received. He had no doubt about the explanations, and that it would be shown that Admiral Kuper would not have burnt down the town if he could have avoided it. Then it had been insinuated that her Majesty's Government had felt no regret at this occurrence. The first think they did on hearing the news was to write a despatch in which they expressed their regret. That regret had been embodied in the Queen's Speech, had been re-echoed by the house, and deeply felt throughout the country. Not only had they expressed regret, but her Al ajesty's Government had done everything they could to prevent a recurrence of ouch disasters, (The hon. gentleman read extracts from the despatches in proof of the assertion.) Not only had her Majesty's Government and the house expressed their regret for what had occurred, but every precaution had been taken to prevent such a calamity in future. The resolution said that what had been done was " contrary to those usages of war which prevail among civilised nations." He would ven ture to say that this was not so. It was not contrary to the usages of war to bombard a town provided with batte ries as a means of defence against ships brought into col lision with it. The case was otherwise where a town had no defences. We did not in the Crimean war bombard Odessa because it had no batteries to attack our fleet. Of towns that had been bombarded by civilised nations he might mention Algiers, which was bombarded in 1816, Ant werp in 1830, Beyrout by the Turkish fleet, Acre in 1840 by the English, and Barcelona, by the Spanish Go vernment. The French bombarded Tangiers, a peaceful town, and the private property of the Emperor of Morocco, and allowed the Rabyle barbarians to come down upon it and sack it. Rome was bombarded in Juno and July, 1848, and in 1854 the Americans bombarded Greytown and burned it to the ground. Here there were no batteries to protect the town, yet the ships fired on it. In defence of this conduct the President of America said the arrogant contumacy of the inhabitants lett no alternative but to break up their establishments, or leave them under the impres sion that they might pursue a career of lawlessness and plunder. What was taking place now in America ? Charles ton was being bombarded. (Hear.) That town had batte ries, certainly, but then the Federals were constantly throw ing Greek fire and missiles into the town, We heard of women and children being killed there, yet some persons justified this mode of assault. (Disapprobation.) These bombardments were not merely carried on by sea. Last year we heard of the bombardment of Port Jackson, and the New York papers described, with apparent satisfaction, how the houses and public buildings were destroyed. (Hear, hear.) That was justified. (Opposition cheers.) He quoted these cases to prove that civilised nations considered the bombardment of towns as coming within the usages of war. (Hear, hear.) When our ships were fired on at Kagosime it was our duty to return the fire. (Hear.) No British admiral could avoid doing so. (Hear, hear.) In this affair the papers would show that the admiral's conduct had met with the approval of the French. It was stated that the English had not been sufficiently concilia t The papers showed that the Americans had suffered sever ely by icing too conciliatory. In the papers laid before Congress the American Minister at Japan said, " I have not been anxious until recently for the presence of a naval force, but my opinion has undergone a great change," and then he recommended the sending a naval force to Japan ue neces sary for some time to preserve to the world what had been gained. He stated also that it was the presence of the Lri- duce it. Lord R. CECIL—And was there no verbal demand ? Mr. LAYARD—No verbal communication in that Renee was ever hold: The motion for adjournment was ultimately agreed to. KAGOSIMA. Mr. BUXTON moved the following resolution :—" That this house, while only imputing to Admiral Kuper a misconception of the duty imposed on him, deeply regrets the burning of the town of Kagosima, as being contrary to those usages of war which prevail among civilised nations, and to which it . _ is the duty and policy of this country to adhere." In the course of a long address he cited several authorities on international law to show that the bombardment of Kagosima was directly opposed to the dictum of the most celebrated writers on maritime law. Mr. AYTOUN, in seconding the motion, condemned the arroganne of the English merchants and residents in Japan as having been the real cause of enmity felt towards us by the natives, Mr. LONGFIELD proposed, as an amendment, to omit from Mr. Buxton's resolution the words " while only im puting to Admiral Kuper a misconception of the duty im posed on him." His object was to free a gallant and meri torious officer from the grave imputation that was sought to be cast upon him by the terms of the resolution. He con tended that Admiral Kuper had done no more than execute the commands with which he was entrusted, and there had been no cold-blooded cruelty, misconception of orders, or terrible mistake on his part. He understood his instructions well. He obeyed the orders that were given him. The measures he concerted were within both the letter and the spirit of his instructions ; and what he conceived prudently he had executed bravely. The orders given to him by Colonel Neale, her Majesty's representative in Japan, in accordance with instructions received from the Foreign office, included the burning of the town of Kagosima and the palace of Prince Satsuma, which he performed with the knowledge and in the presence of Colonel Neale himself, who, having given the orders, knew the consequences, and expressed his satisfaction at the result. The resolution of Mr. Buxton was nothing else than an attempt to offer up Admiral Kuper as a scapegoat to save the Government from the censure of the house. Sir J. HAY seconded the amendment, and said that the imputation thrown upon Admiral Kuper did no credit either to the Government or those persons who had thus assailed a brave and worthy man. The duty be had executed was imposed upon him by the bai bayous orders of the Foreign Office, and the attack on Kagosima, following upon the affair in Siam last year, was but the culminating point of the policy which the Government had of late adopted in the East. Lord STANLEY—I quite understand the reluctance of my hon. and gallant friend to pass any censure on persons who, whether in a civil or military capacity, are perform ing a very responsible duty at a great distance from home, and labouring under disadvantages in respect to receiving instructions. I share in that feeling, and I shall be glad if I hear from the hon. gentleman the member for Southwark (\lr. Layard) a better defence for these proceedings than appears in the papers which have been laid before us. Ido not intend to go again over the ground covered by tb.e speech of the hon. member for Maidstone ; but I will call the attention of the house to one or two points, and I will do so in order that an answer may be given by the Under. Secretary. Id 3 not understand what justification can be alleged for the double claim made by her Majesty's Go vernment—first, the claim made on the Tycoon; and next, that made on the Prince of Satsuma. I could understand either if the other were not put forward. (Hear, hear). I could understand your treating the Prince as entirely inde pendent, and then your course might be obvious, You might have applied to the Tycoon in the first instance, and if he replied, " I cannot punish the Prince of Satsuma," you might have said, " Then we give you fair notice that we shall take the affair out of your hands and punish him ourselves." But if the Prince of Satsuma is re sponsible for the murder, then this demand of £lOO,OOO from the Tycoon, who is not responsible, who did not order the murder, and could not have prevented it, is simply unjustifiable. (Hear, hear.) On the other hand, if the Prince of Satsuma is to be treated as a subject, no doubt we have a right to come on the Government of Japan for compensation; but then we ought to leave it to the Government to settle matters with the Daimio. (Hear, hear.) But the responsibility of the one, from the nature of the ea , e, seems to exclude the responsibility of the other, and therefore those who have conducted the negotiations on the part of this country have pat us in the wrong. It also appears to me that the amount of the demand is altoge ther exorbitant and excessive, No doubt it is very painful and difficult to have to value human life; but one can only judge of what would be done if such a case occurred in Europe. If the murder of a British subject took place un der anything like similar circumstances in a European country, you would insist on the punishment of the offen der, and demand compensation; but it appears to me that you would not do anything analogous to what you have done in this ease by demanding £lOO,OOO from the Tycoon, who was not responsible for the murder, and making a further demand of £25,000 of the Prince of Satsuma, whom you hold to have been responsible. (Hear.) There is ano ther point to which I think the house ought to look. The hon. member for Maidstone spoke of the inhumanity of those proceedings. I look at the matter in another way, and say that their impolicy is greater than their inhu manity. (Hear.) You know the Tycoon is in great diffi culty between the Daimios and the foreign merchants and diplomatists. You have, then, to deal with a Government which may be taken to be neutral between the two ; you have the great chiefs, who undoubtedly are hostile to foreigners; and, lastly, you have the people, of whom we we do not know whether or not they share the preju dice of the chiefs against foreigners, but who, at all events, have nothing to lose by the country being open to foreigners, and may have a great deal to gain. I think it clear, then, that your policy ought to be to lessen the in fluence of the Daimios on the people, and to conciliate the latter. (Hear, hear.) lam afraid your proceedings in reference to this murder will have a contrary effect. All they will know about the affair is that the foreigners have had a quarrel with the chiefs and destroyed a town. That will place the Daimios in the position of being the natural protectors of the people, whereas your object ought to be to separate those two classes, and to show the natives that though you may take a part against the chiefs, you do so in the interest of the people. (Hear, hear.) lam afraid it will be a long time before the impression created in the minds of the people by those proceedings will be obliterated. I also think it is very questionable whether what you have done will have very much effect on the chiefs. I do not say anything as to the destruction of batteries, because as you treated the Prince of Satsuma as an independent per • son no objection could be taken to your destroying his forts ; but when your doing that involved the destruction of a town, it is another matter. I do not expect that much moral effect will be produced on the Daimios by such an opera tion as that. It reminds me of the story of an Irish ab sentee landlord whose agent sent him over a threatening letter whioh he had received. The landlord, in reply, said "Tell those fellows they are great fools if they think that by shooting you they will intimidate nie." (Much laughter.) I very much fear that the same is the case with the Daimios. They are not likely to be intimidated by punishments which fall on the people. (Hear, hear.) You will not frighten tho class on whom you wish to make an effect, but you will make enemies of the class whom you want to have your friends. (Hear, hear.) In these sense papers I see a trans action, of the same date, which bears on this case. It seems that in October of last year there was a good deal of anxiety felt among the traders because the trade in silk was falling off. What was the reason of this falling off? Col. Neale, writing to the Japanese Minister, says : " The matter respecting the restricted arrivals of silk being now well known to be caused by no accident or want of the material, but by a systematic arrangement of a few of the principal silk dealers, or monopolisers, at Yeddo ; great un easiness and alarm prevail among the mercantile community of Yokohama." Upon that assumption, because those dealers in silk at Yeddo are doing that which dealers in Manchester and Liverpool sometimes do—because they are' holding back produce for high prices —(hear, hear)—our representative writes a very peremptory letter, and the Japanese Govern ment is called upon to explain. (Hear, hear.) That is not the way you would act towards any European Government. That letter throws light upon whatever may be doubtful in other traneeetions, and shows what 'our feelings and bear. tish Peet in those waters which brought reeent troubles to a peaceful cciteln.ion, (Cheers.) This was the telommen dation of the represenre of a power which followed the policy recommended by the hod. !member for Northumber land. That Minister's house was burned, :!"-4 no notice taken of the matter by the authorities, and now he wag ttampelle"J to admit that the American policy was a false one, and altst the policy of England was thb only one by which peaceful relations could be established with Japan, (General ap _ _ probation.) Were they to do as the Dutch did ? They gro velled on their bellies. Did they prosper? No, their posi tion became so intolerable that they were obliged to give up their trade• (Hear.) Our agents were the best judges of what should be done. Our trade, in consequence of the course adopted was rapidly increasing, and of the £7,000,000 and more invested in mercantile pursuits in Japan, more than half that amount was British. (Hear.) An attempt had been made to interfere with the silk trade, but in con• sequence of the firm representations of Col. Neale the Go vernment removed the restrictions complained of. Our re lations with Japan were purely commercial. Our object was to carry out the views of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bright) below the gangway. (Laughter.) If that hon. gentleman, instead of making exciting speeches in the country, would endeavour to impress moderation on his hearers, and advise them to give the Government credit for better intentions, he would be much more ( useful. (Hear.) From what ho (Mr. Layard) kne s of the East he believed that most of our difficulties there were created by the British traders. A host of traders rushed into every market, ,and they con sidered that the Government had nothing to do but to sup port them in their preposterous pretentious. He could not agree with the terms of the motion. If the hon. gentleman withdrew the words casting an imputation on Admiral Kuper, who had no opportunity of defending himself, he (Mr. Layard) would not oppose the motion, but if not he would move the previous question. (Hear, hear,) Sir J. ELPHINSTONE supported the amendment. Mr. W. E. FORSTER believed the destruction of that city was intentional, and ventured to prophesy that when the explanations came from the other side the only feeling would be one of astonishment that we had ever expected anything else than what had happened. The idea of shel ling the Prince's residence was suggested by the Minister at home, who ought to have known that it would have been almost impossible to do that without burning the town. He thought, however, the house should not endeavour to apportion the blame, but content itself with a simple ex pression of regret; and he recommended Mr. Buxton to as- sent to the amendment. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL defended the conduct of the Government, and its political and military agents, in reference to the unhappy calamity that had befallen the city of Kagosiwa. Mr. WHITESIDE attached the entire blame to the Foreign Secretary, upon whose instructions the city had been bombarded. The question at issue was, whether this country itself intended to practise those principles of huma nity which it was ever so ready to advise all other nations to adopt. If we maintained such acts as had been done in this case our laurels would be tarnished, and in vain should we represent ourselves to the world as the most humane people on the face of the earth. Lord PALMERSTON—The right hon. and learned gin• tleman said that there was one point which had not been adverted to by my hun t and learned friend—viz., the double demand which has been made in Japan. Now, Sir, it is un necessary to travel over ground which was so ably gone over by my hon. friend the Under Secretary, and my hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General. But I must say, in the first place, that the treaty with Japan was in my opinion a wise and useful arrangement. (Hear, hear.) I be lieve I may appeal to the other side to bear me out in that (Hear, hear.) It was concluded with the treaty-making power of that country. Although there is a division of autho rity in Japan, there being a spiritual chief, the Mikado, as well as the Tycoon, yet there is no doubt whatever that the Tycoon is the treaty-making and governing power, and that was admitted by the Prince of Satsuma iu a conversa tion with Col. Neale, in which he said, " The Tycoon was to blame when ha made that treaty for not having inserted in it a clause giving to Daimios exclusive possession of the roads in which they might make their processions." (Hear, hear.) Well, that treaty has been in force now for several years, we have appealed to it in cases in which we consi dered its provisions not duly carried out, and it has never been urged in reply that it was not binding because it had not received the sanction of the Mikado. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, I dismiss altogether the doubts as to the bind ing nature of the treaty as having been made only by the Tycoon. I think no man can doubt that British subjects, both officials and private merchants, having been subjected to repeated acts of outrage, attempted and perpetrated in Japan, it would have been unbecoming, unfitting, and cri minal in the British Government to allow those outrages to pass unpunished without demanding reparation or redress, We should have been exposing our fellow-subjects in Japan, resorting thither under the stipulations of the treaty, to the murderous caprice of these Daimios and their retainers, who, as my hon. friend stated, exercised such undisputed sway in the country that when they purchased a new sword and want to try the edge, they sally forth into the streets and cut down the first person they meet there. It was ne cessary, therefore, for the security of our fellow-subjects and the honour of the country that satisfaction should be de manded for these outrages. But then lam asked, " Why have you demanded satisfaction both from the Tycoon's Government and from the Daimio, by whose retainers these particular outrages were committed ?" The fact was this—there was a double default. (Hear.) The Tycoon's Government were bound to give security to British subjects within the range of their authority. This outrage was com menced within the range of their authority. It was commit ted upon the road called the Tokaido, which had been ex pressly assigned for the use of British subjects, in order that they might take their exercise there without molesta tion. It was the duty of the Tycoon's Government, if they knew that a body of the Daimio's retainers were going in procession along the road on a given day, and if they knew and expected that any meeting between the procession and British subjects might lead to violence, I say it was their duty in such a case to have stationed guards upon the road in order to protect Europeans. (Hear, hear.) We are there fore justly entitled to require from the Tycoon's Government a sum sufficient to operate as a fine upon them for not afford ing proper protection to British subjects in a place in which our countrymen were entitled to be. (Hear.) We were also entitled to demand the punishment of the retainers who had committed the outrages. But the Tycoon's Government said "We are unable to afford this redress. These Daimios are so powerful, that they defy our authority. We cannot get you satisfaction ; if you want it you must go to the Daimio and get it yourself." Then we demanded, in the first place satisfaction from the Government for their fault in not taking those precautions which they might have taken, and which it was their duty to take ; and we demanded satisfaction from the Daimio whose retainers committed the outrage by which a British subject had so grievously suffered. And really, when we are told by the hon. member who moved the amend - ment that this was:a sort of chance medley, a casual encoun ter, which was below notice on the part of the British Go vernment, I do not think we should have been justified, and I am sure the nation would not have thought us justified, in holing the lives of British subjects so cheap. (Hear, hear,) Sir, I cannot compliment the hon. member upon the good taste he showed in that part of his speech. (Hear.) Well, then, satisfaction was demanded and satisfaction was granted by the Tycoon's Government, who consented to pay the sum we requred. But Prince Satsuma refused. Were we to submit to his refusal, or compel him to give us that redress to which we were so justly entitled ? I say that we should have failed in our duty if we had not resorted to the means which were at our disposal for the purpose of com pelling this brutal Daimio to give us satisfaction for the outrage. (Hear, hear.) It was not simply for the purpose of punishing him—it was for the purpose of deterring others from these murders, and were so frequently attempted, and which had in some cases unfortunately been actually com mitted. (Hear, hear.) Why, the attack upon our Lega tion, the murder of two sentries at the door of the Legation on another occasion—both of those atrocities were committed by the retainers of Daimios who were specially employed by the Tycoon's Government to protect the very people whom they so barbarously attacked and, in some cases, murdered. It was necessary for the protection of British subjects that these Daimios should be taught that although they might set at defiance the authority of the Tycoon, they could not with impunity commit outrages upon British subjects, (Hear, hear.) Akmiral Kuper was therefore ordered, in case redress was refused, to use force in order to obtain it. My noble friend at the head of the Foreign-office gave in structions not simply on his own authority, but instructions sanctioned by the Government, and for which I tak3 as full a responsibility as any that can attach to him. (Hear.) I entirely approved at the time, I entirely approve now, of the course which my noble friend took; and I say that it was the only course which was consistent with his duty as a Minister of the Crown, and as representing the interests of this country abroad. (Hear, hear.) Did my noble friend say "Go and burn a defenceless town ?" No such thing. He left it to the discretion of the admiral either to blackade the town and port belonging to Prince Satsuma, or to de stroy his forts and his castle if that could be easily done. Admiral Kuper performed his duty as a British officer ought to perform it. He did not begin an attack upon the forts. Ho demanded satisfaction, and parleyed for two days with the envoys of Prince Satsuma. As my hon. friend (Mr, L ai ar d) said, they twice tried by acts of treachery first to inveigle him and Colonel Neale ashore, and we know pretty well what would have happened to them there ; and next to surprise the vessel, and take it by asking permis sion to bring 40 armed retainers on board. This leave was given, but a party of marines of equal force was ranged opposite to them, and then they thought it better to re embark in their boat, without carrying out the object for which they h a d came prepared. After two d ays s p en t i n negotiati on , Ad m i ral Kuper sent to take possess i on o f t h e steamers by way of reprisal, and if Prince Satsuma had yielded to our demands those steamers would have been released, and no harm would have been done to his forts or to the town. But while these steamers were in the pos session of our ships the forts opened fire upon the British squadron. I trust there is no man in this house who will maintain that, when a British admiral commanding a squad ron is fired at by a foreign battery, it is not his duty to res turn the fire and to teach the enemy that British ships are not to be insulted and attacked with impunity. Well, then, Admiral K u p er was compelled to b urn th e s t eamer s, i n or d er that his ships might be free for action, In the course of •••••••••.••••••••1101........................................"" that action th e ---,--et. town was set on fire, and we deeply reg this incident. But the house must recollect the circunr stances a violent der which the action took place. There wa s . gale. The ships were firing your gun upon a fixed sea, it is one thing to fire at an object when Y° ll b''';'3 different thing ~ , . to fire at an object when your gun is in ship roiling in the waves, when at every moment i shifts its positlen, and when the aim you take is not the point s ! platform, as on shore; it is a Y . el: which the shot strikes. When in addition to storm t they had the smoke and heat of action, 1 think; he house will see it was impossible to be sure that the ellos would not go over the batteries and fall into the town. l'"e probability tern my hon. friend has stated, in all haulm; population of that town had received notice to qu it t , , 11 . 6 , 1 t, habitations, were and very few of them were in thei9u6terib'lleald-a and burnt. We know that when questions arose at o e ' itr , other places it was recognised as a sign of 1 ° 44 0 0 a violew, tentions on the part of the Government that the JaP , everypopulationpeoplereafson to hope that similar warning was g iTel3 til ii s Choir ho..tei Kagosima, and that very few were in whe the ° conflagration took place. Towns inJapau are bin' i t s h l e an fr d a a ll a e r s e t possible . materials. It is well known that tbletosa subject to frequent and severe earthquake°. tr r p i eo i ple cannot, dare not, build their houses of solid ra:o down..a s, lest the shock of the earthquake should bri l3g. ~„/,, P that tent They are built of wood, of bamboos, oda P`;` o. ,, w i li e i i ch yield to the oscillations of an earthquilre. Ilat,joa h il ler ; wtpaperhear titions, which they were ultimately expelled. I say fn ell 6 0 0 0 burning tohoemyetltnoouthgehmt tthherraoti.: inters 1 to si of the town was not the result of anY the thmeanideemubPeorns othf elSehbaedglitticti;; actionpart of Admiral Kuper, but was merely incideniso b:r, fimh:veuaihinwrr partitionsi de ant eh se r us ooapuui assailants natosnn Legationdde attackir‘d when honwmeo nta was a s housed 01) 1 i the which was not brought on by us, but Was b eg o t, ia tur e n n in ex g pointJapanese,of honour and upon which the Admiral 0° 14 . 1) 4 ts' st t h h o. a t h T e hte a h th o e no fi u re r and dthoefhdauttteyr,ieresf.ra(iunefraorm.) elatteisri e lf i i that " 011 , tc to C P d n a d y h h is e rsehtealilneedrsthweecraesntolet, wanitdhitirsavpaasaihtisy a d• ' l l o s. the lives of British subjects. It was proper object was to teach the Daimio by Persi°orrice .u_Aadi againstr o i. ogp,uwi he l h i ava u tat p itihr e eed r al nt t n o adaio d tneu i es r rd e an c lool t yft h ts i hsh s peo s r wtheoaewdl that tihttgeaahineteadosi: i t tfigh t ia h rege e:;: je t : d o t d 6 : oe tt p l tn ise l ic : tr i l' :o w tf ; fil i which hafi he b iinn ut th i it hsapsebe ecehnoaf p l r hr o eea b rd a y : i ly a - jeexsttyen,sdeedowitwoivsesriontheresgarterpot Cyst of the tow n n an t. d Ve are called upon to say that We septaregont; result. Well, Sir, we entirely concur with the , it slO r theg o the Session, expressed in the most fornna ' 0 ov er more pe f a o t r i m ng al i l n y a .2 mostformal manner by this house in the Acla e° to e and has been adopted and reP e a of& is reply re to that Speech. It is not usual for this W ise s Del i ' has .sre b e u e e e n e ed 3'' moved, e l a e xu s p s dr f ew o s r sh m eidc a h l ,h m enfo a o n rde n o- e u r bt t ba w (Heari iiss;libbeaiscr:.:::3ooifiletti! fore, I reducing the motion by the anoend°l,e/1j tor it consi , stent h w i ith the usual i town d and to two "hits— efonrtmiraellympartake of it, and an opinion that the bombardment of t° e icili s° ! nations.having disposed of the regret by sal i !`ltgli ill r I v61106°13', j 3 Y r th a e nner expressed that feeling, point— truth. There are innumerable assertion that the bombardment of to! ' toe o consistentwar.Tha with the practice of civilised nations ,I.ljyriticii! t assertion is not correct — it . . t eon 6 '' - bee' IS 110 via ei bombarded. Some have been already mentioned, an d e .;e lo a list of others. History and records of P, il3 ; of 6 „ c snow that many prtrehagacrtitetiitte hsesjo:i f h e the o es 'uocasf:etDog3h!jaaltt isr:7ciseliot°ll: fill:v,l is unfortunately at the practice of bombarding towns in tine ; of would eal reo () b r e d directly s. scribed as h t i i s ° t ß o s ri praetioe t i u s nately not unusual. Therefore, to asSertlr 600 a civilised nations with the usual practiced° fo ts d e : used na • not tions has been such ; I think it is desirable jftev it in imitate it, and it is not our pract* We t °41 :11 eell sc : the Russian war, as in the casel°°Of Nees* . a i l to t' ° knewcontained magazines of various kinds essenti otaY ~,,d , iota _,, h it supply of the Russian army but we ab stai n s we tb 1 ;01 ing Odessa, which was not ;lameoehnttrtalarye Ptr°a'tiltii:;ll;jaili .fortified t o r n' 1,00 of t his c eol i of would not be in accordance ' to attack an undefended town, thnetfo dleprire tbeneeitrati° hostile ° tio r) lb! . stores which would be useful,tovhim for d Denying entirely the truth of the pose pr o n' t ' a the bomb . 0_ civilised nations in time of war, I ant Per fe e ' l p O lej 3 agree that it is a practice of which we disaPPl;i'r 13es'ieif, are not disposed to folios'. (tooenstit4o, Therefore m l ly cannot accept the truth of the st, it h t ot ; ‘ iil Ido accept the meaning whle' .pnii ' H and spirit upon tio , fi- v ie. ment is made. ( ear.) I should hope la . t his d e ,i,li be satisfied No with the tone which has prevailed in to , ivi' c f ought to I think, has maintained that it is a Pr° lorpooo,i to be followed to bombard towns fa r t ni he b P on, t h is e re destroying the houses and property of nen‘c,,°-0; tbs'-took innocent persons ; but nobody can deny that " . , 0 o i a d ti e ' f . or suit of a ing foreesi conflict between attacking forces ont•P',,,olie6°„ers' whioh are among it is one of those incidental c 2 3 ); o tile do th the calamities attaching t ° sea il he tions. areeng Therefore I hope my hon. friend o'illbie for ‘i ll i le • joil, havino• b obtained an admission of the prin eiP h: l° P.-lisd b° contends, asit and not be disposed to press hie uot'ila it iic °''' I nt of would be surplusage to express regret °_,,-borel°e" 11'0 contrarytowns to historical fact to say that the'bo' 000 is not practised among civilized nstions•to peeeso,l o. amendment is disposed of I should pries° betl.4irttp;' motion with the previous question ; but if Al 01 0 4 ' h . el; ter uld withdraw it, I think it would be t" r °P c " ' tone o f must t in h atim of a discussion the tone an d ch ) 0,014%4 Mr. avebeen satisfactory to him. the ( C' -eell. O''' BUXTON expressed his d ire erhos es I f }YIP' regret which had fallen from then oble lord , r De r his motion. I a' ; o.ol o°' The house, however, dissented from this x 'oil . upon q ueot i Lord PALINIERSTON moved the previou6.e, The house then divided. The numbers W el 5 5 ~.. •• '' 1 64 Ayes ..... • • ' '',....;j i ....... Noes ..... ............• The Majority for the Government •"' original motion therefore deoppea• 4 0. to l°. APPEAL IN CRIMINAI, CA" give° -e, 0 was . l os , a On the • motion of Sir F. KELL Y ' lea f vilat, 01; lin cri 'on ° troduce a bill • providing a further appea , . 60 .0 and for the further amendment of the adn'lllll criminal law. commutation CHURCHof stance the eui.church bill f ' t 1\ ' 1„.1 1 err:. vi'llew.loaVsitDisGwitTuoTlEabitdroiaEanlsillsgkoEpeivi dnAboltseibir:astovatieb(oulteiß,:ina.irlslii,oetaaria:lcee'vevitiao)oq,ei6ootiodlit: j s A, houseiraNgvei vac OF given had introduced las t e t r the rallteAs.TETl:e bilise:;; trusted the cer tain amend the law et tresp ass in land. a bill to gating the e proving and sale of chain 311 CHAIN CABLES AND Al`-- i.,i1l '° ca bles r feb 4 ' Mr. LAIRD obtained leave to introduce e , 0 0 011' resolve into itm ACO S' t ft, of t jty i Nas ordered that the house, 1 sc etlP voatießoonAmNomfKitthteeAecCoHnTAth(NSeCci3oEaT:LLA:et7;lltorr!., if 11) On the motion of Mr.BljF.Fa s l l- .L . , the tinytisere,rs(e:te4l4 comThmeitrtesepeloitratnojdnoagreed to a vote of suPP IY ',' / 4 ,..i t I. ' 6 1s. ' The house adjoi ... .r . i_ .. ied g 40...........111iia11tes past s L ub A je W ct ß w E .as N a C g E r :d 6to.iire'''cl je3ce.,, to bring in the bill. o 'cl e '' . a st ept3 03 a 1)°1 e 0: [ADTERTISEMEXT.I -llolloway'a r -itay 00111;0, cheerless, indeed, is the present season, sc't-iso j 3 P r° o o P deaths are far above the average. The,c4iett hs'ielyt:cls.,''4 diffused through the dull, damp fog's which I ''' to '; prevalent of late. These pills purifY th e ,v to ic 0 0 been contaminated by foul gases, and gli.°, etrogott'i nervous system, whereby typhus, lIgh°„;00 ar e , t oll ° bilious fevers are warded off. IlollowaY's r t o gei 3 r co ts ' best known promoters of digestion, the s'iresof a ll sP e i ,jes t ' the liver, and the most valued and effetive°,,,ootitet,,igife' When the health is impaired with loss 0 , r ' t r a l y , res t ' and sleep, this medicine will be found a e e will rarely fail to effect a cure. .___________,----''z/7 and • ________—_----- __-- --- ' 0 Births. 1 na-Piet OP* olo i " FENwrelc—On the 9th inst., at :.',3, PO- Tott.Ke,l4l 7., of C. R. Fenwick, Esq., of a rion. oleeu, iy , .` KELSEY. —On the 9th inst., at Pagrjoijatu il,O late of Clapham-park, the wife 0 1 oc rte , Esq., of a son. f irl‘f MUNRO—On the Bth Esq.,nat Totteridge'P dy ~,•(4 wire of David Munro, qof a sell' , the l' e Scorn. —On the 7th inst., t Edinburgur , Scott, of a son. 1 ° IttarriageS. oi pas 0, a O ur ,-.6t S ° ly irS DixoN—Bhisco.—On the Bth just., 13-t yoUl3g-tDO 1011 church, Cumberland, George 1:.,"d5°, 'O, k a ) l ., l ,l;tic a the late John Dixon, Esq., of e y .of b. - 4 daughter of Sir Robert Briseo, i 3e '' , a ree' ~t• Cumberland. Church, Enniskerry,at r•-rioter•• 43, MuRPHY—EIEoGit.—On. the 2.1 it'eti,;,,J., Iptio 01i law, to Mary Josephine, eldest ail,.. Hon. Mr. Justice lileogh, 3 ' l° ' l4 , pl . ' D e aths. D oi , c.ater, W a '' v tit; REAL.—On the Gth inst., at BcYs . • oft l/8 r James MurPl2l:o., gilt,y 0 late of Exeter, aged 56. s piiWs , v ia CsP I lls, DAws.—On the 7th inst., Mr. The wa Hotel, Jerrnyn-street, a g-od 50:-robriag°-1 63. , tlO arDsoN..-On. the Bth inst., a.. , s. age tom George Isaac Hudson, late 11 * 11 , .T.Jl.pu.per'43r°°l‘l3 greet' LyGoN,—On. the sth lag, at 1, ec Orri r Lacy Louisa Lygon. Grea t r..il 4 - t 34, a CO. A,(101 LITTLE. -011 the Bth. inst. , a i , , ,,q,, abed o rt, •- 13erniondsey, Thomas Little, 5.,-•010, :10•001) vreo, • MENDS. —O the 7th ins t., a t sorrl iastcr William B. Mends, aged 8 • _,. sarbitou, wress' TRYNNE.—On the 7th inst., !•,_lnorge_orest, Thynne, Esq., of 11, Great U. •I'''ir,o. aged 59. Ol t , ; iil'• __-- opiA•ce ; •,,o• g -------- c il. ',ill f 9 - -------- ci D y I, - ~,„i ..., , 0 0 , .b.islie London : 11 ,Strand, and I'S .- at , i 0 ,a tb e r.. of O. 112, Strand, Yrinter, ,se ,isvoi, 50. Strand, in the rrecinct o...l,cluftry 10, 4 Mildlesex ...-Wednesdalr, I. NoR, 4 4 , 4. s Th e Th e 14 88 Jame ~U 4y ~ E